How can I get 2.x-like sorting behaviour in Python 3.x?

Question

I\'m trying to replicate (and if possible improve on) Python 2.x\'s sorting behaviour in 3.x, so that mutually orderable types like int, float etc.

Answer 1

This answer aims to faithfully re-create the Python 2 sort order, in Python 3, in every detail.

The actual Python 2 implementation is quite involved, but object.c's default_3way_compare does the final fallback after instances have been given a chance to implement normal comparison rules. This is after individual types have been given a chance to compare (via the __cmp__ or __lt__ hooks).

Implementing that function as pure Python in a wrapper, plus emulating the exceptions to the rules (dict and complex numbers specifically) gives us the same Python 2 sorting semantics in Python 3:

from numbers import Number


# decorator for type to function mapping special cases
def per_type_cmp(type_):
    try:
        mapping = per_type_cmp.mapping
    except AttributeError:
        mapping = per_type_cmp.mapping = {}
    def decorator(cmpfunc):
        mapping[type_] = cmpfunc
        return cmpfunc
    return decorator


class python2_sort_key(object):
    _unhandled_types = {complex}

    def __init__(self, ob):
       self._ob = ob

    def __lt__(self, other):
        _unhandled_types = self._unhandled_types
        self, other = self._ob, other._ob  # we don't care about the wrapper

        # default_3way_compare is used only if direct comparison failed
        try:
            return self < other
        except TypeError:
            pass

        # hooks to implement special casing for types, dict in Py2 has
        # a dedicated __cmp__ method that is gone in Py3 for example.
        for type_, special_cmp in per_type_cmp.mapping.items():
            if isinstance(self, type_) and isinstance(other, type_):
                return special_cmp(self, other)

        # explicitly raise again for types that won't sort in Python 2 either
        if type(self) in _unhandled_types:
            raise TypeError('no ordering relation is defined for {}'.format(
                type(self).__name__))
        if type(other) in _unhandled_types:
            raise TypeError('no ordering relation is defined for {}'.format(
                type(other).__name__))

        # default_3way_compare from Python 2 as Python code
        # same type but no ordering defined, go by id
        if type(self) is type(other):
            return id(self) < id(other)

        # None always comes first
        if self is None:
            return True
        if other is None:
            return False

        # Sort by typename, but numbers are sorted before other types
        self_tname = '' if isinstance(self, Number) else type(self).__name__
        other_tname = '' if isinstance(other, Number) else type(other).__name__

        if self_tname != other_tname:
            return self_tname < other_tname

        # same typename, or both numbers, but different type objects, order
        # by the id of the type object
        return id(type(self)) < id(type(other))


@per_type_cmp(dict)
def dict_cmp(a, b, _s=object()):
    if len(a) != len(b):
        return len(a) < len(b)
    adiff = min((k for k in a if a[k] != b.get(k, _s)), key=python2_sort_key, default=_s)
    if adiff is _s:
        # All keys in a have a matching value in b, so the dicts are equal
        return False
    bdiff = min((k for k in b if b[k] != a.get(k, _s)), key=python2_sort_key)
    if adiff != bdiff:
        return python2_sort_key(adiff) < python2_sort_key(bdiff)
    return python2_sort_key(a[adiff]) < python2_sort_key(b[bdiff])

I incorporated handling dictionary sorting as implemented in Python 2, since that'd be supported by the type itself via a __cmp__ hook. I've stuck to the Python 2 ordering for the keys and values as well, naturally.

I've also added special casing for complex numbers, as Python 2 raises an exception when you try sort to these:

>>> sorted([0.0, 1, (1+0j), False, (2+3j)])
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "", line 1, in 
TypeError: no ordering relation is defined for complex numbers

You may have to add more special cases if you want to emulate Python 2 behaviour exactly.

If you wanted to sort complex numbers anyway you'll need to consistently put them with the non-numbers group; e.g.:

# Sort by typename, but numbers are sorted before other types
if isinstance(self, Number) and not isinstance(self, complex):
    self_tname = ''
else:
    self_tname = type(self).__name__
if isinstance(other, Number) and not isinstance(other, complex):
    other_tname = ''
else:
    other_tname = type(other).__name__

Some test cases:

>>> sorted([0, 'one', 2.3, 'four', -5], key=python2_sort_key)
[-5, 0, 2.3, 'four', 'one']
>>> sorted([0, 123.4, 5, -6, 7.89], key=python2_sort_key)
[-6, 0, 5, 7.89, 123.4]
>>> sorted([{1:2}, {3:4}], key=python2_sort_key)
[{1: 2}, {3: 4}]
>>> sorted([{1:2}, None, {3:4}], key=python2_sort_key)
[None, {1: 2}, {3: 4}]